EXCHANGE 


c 


l^XTTTA 


-\--i  ' 


The  Seal  of  Connecticut 


By  SIMEON  E.  BALDWIN,  LL.D. 


Reprinted  from 

Papers  of  the  New  Haven  Colony  Historical  Society, 

Volume  Vin 


NEW   HAVEN 

1914 


7 


The  Seal  of  Connecticut 


By  SIMEON  E.   BALDWIN,  LL.D. 


Reprinted  from 

Papers  of  the  New  Haven  Colony  Historical  Society, 

Volume  Vni 


NEW  HAVEN 

1914. 


THE  SEAL  OF  CONNECTICUT. 

Bj  Simeon  E.  Baldwin,  LL.D. 

[Read  November  22,  1909.] 


It  is  dijSicult  for  us  to  enter  into  the  conception  of  the  nature 
of  a  seal,  which  was  common  to  all  Englishmen  in  the  seven- 
teenth century.  To  them,  and  to  their  forefathers  for  many 
generations,  it  was  the  most  solemn  form  of  authenticating  any 
written  expression  of  will,  which  was  intended  to  alter  legal 
relations. 

We  may  not  unfairly  say  that  the  legal  value  of  a  seal  in 
any  community  is  in  inverse  proportion  to  the  education  and 
intelligence  of  its  people.  In  ages  when  hardly  any  except 
the  priest  or  monk  could  write,  and  property  was  mainly 
massed  in  the  hands  of  a  few,  the  seal  afforded  a  simple  and 
generally  effectual  method  of  showing  that  a  conveyance,  a 
charter,  or  any  other  legal  document,  came  from  the  hand,  or 
with  the  approval,  of  those  in  whose  names  it  might  profess 
to  speak. 

Every  great  land-owner  in  England,  by  a  century  or  two 
after  the  Norman  conquest,  had  his  own  coat  of  arms.  His 
seal  was  inscribed  with  this.  No  one,  not  of  his  name  and 
family,  could  lawfully  use  it.  He  took  good  care  that  no  one 
else  should  have  an  opportunity  to  do  so,  by  keeping  it  in  some 
safe  and  secret  place,  or  perhaps  carrying  it  about  upon  his 
person. 

The  Crown  had  its  great  and  its  privy  seal.  The  ecclesias- 
tical and  municipal  corporations  had  theirs. 

In  the  time  of  Edward  I,  every  freeman  and  some  of  the 
villeins  had  a  seal.*  A  deed  of  land,  according  to  English  law, 
until  long  after  the  settlement  of  New  England,  was  well  exe- 

*  Bi^lwtone'&i.  .CcVnipi'eiltaries,  II,  305. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT.  83 

cuted  if  it  bore  the  seal  of  him  whose  grant  it  was,  though 
not  his  signature.  Without  a  seal,  or  a  legal  substitute  for  it, 
a  conveyance  of  land,  though  signed,  is  still  in  Connecticut  no 
deed,  and  ineffectual  to  pass  full  title. 

So  late  as  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century.  Sir 
William  Blackstone  declared,  in  his  Commentaries  on  the  Laws 
of  England,*  that  every  corporation  not  only  could,  but  must 
have  a  common  seal,  for,  he  continued,  it  ^ 'being  an  invisible 
body,  cannot  manifest  its  intentions  by  any  personal  act  or 
oral  discourse :  it  therefore  acts  and  speaks  only  by  its  common 
seal." 

By  the  great  seal  of  the  State,  the  first  and  greatest  of 
corporations,  all  important  public  acts  were  attested,  and  with- 
out its  use,  it  hardly  seemed  to  the  popular  mind,  in  early 
English  history,  to  be  possible  to  administer  and  uphold  the 
government.  When  James  II,  driven  from  the  throne  of  Eng- 
land, made  his  first  attempt  to  escape  from  the  kingdom,  his 
last  act,  in  crossing  the  Thames,  was  to  throw  the  great  seal 
overboard,  in  the  hope,  no  doubt,  that  proceedings  to  displace 
him  would  thus  be  brought  to  a  full  stop.f 

The  great  seal  of  a  foreign  power  has  always  been  recognized 
as  sufficiently  authenticating  its  official  acts.  The  seal  is  said 
to  prove  itself.  Every  sovereign  is  supposed  to  be  familiar 
with  the  appearance  of  the  great  seal  of  every  other  sovereign ; 
and  the  same  familiarity  is  imputed  to  his  courts  of  justice. 

In  1663,  when  Governor  Stuyvesant  was  at  odds  with  the 
Colony  of  Connecticut  as  to  the  Dutch  title  to  some  of  the 
Long  Island  towns,  he  urged  the  directors  of  the  'New  ISTether- 
land  company  to  procure  from  the  States-General  a  patent  or 
letter  defining  the  limits  of  the  Dutch  possessions  in  America, 
and  recommended  that  it  be  "sealed  with  their  High  Mighti- 
nesses' Great  seal,  at  which  an  Englishman  commonly  gapes  as 
at  an  idol."  This,  he  wrote,  would  help  matters  complicated 
by  "the  unrighteous,  stubborn,  impudent  and  pertinacious 
proceedings  of  the  English  at  Hartford.^J 

*  I,  475. 

t  Macaulay's  Hist,  of  England,  III,  293,  London  Ed.  of  1863. 

t  Documents  relating  to  the  Col.  Hist,  of  N.  Y.,  II,  488,  484. 


84:  THE    SEAL    OF    CONITECTICUT. 

Connecticut  was  settled  under  authority  of  those  who  had 
obtained  grants  from  a  public  corporation  under  the  name  of 
'^the  Council  established  at  Plymouth  in  the  County  of  Devon 
for  the  planting,  ruling,  ordering  and  governing  of  ^ew  Eng- 
land in  America,"  which  was  incorporated  by  the  Crown  on 
November  3,  1620.  The  charter  particularly  provided  that 
the  forty  persons  named  as  the  original  members  and  "their 
Successors  shall  have  and  enjoy  for  ever  a  Common  Seale,  to 
be  engraven  according  to  their  Discretions;  and  that  it  shall 
be  lawfull  for  them  to  appoint  whatever  Seale  or  Scales  they 
shall  think  most  meete  and  necessary,  either  for  their  Uses, 
as  they  are  one  united  Body  incorporate  here,  or  for  the  publick 
of  their  Govemour  and  ministers  of  'New  England  aforesaid, 
whereby  the  Incorporation  may  or  shall  seale  any  Manner  of 
Instrument  touching  the  same  Corporation,  and  the  Manors, 
Lands,  Tenements,  Eents,  Eeversions,  Annuities,  Heredita- 
ments, Goods,  Chatties,  Affaires,  and  any  other  Things  belong- 
ing unto,  or  in  any  wise  appertaininge,  touching,  or  concerning 
the  said  Corporation  and  plantation  in  and  by  these  our  Letters- 
Patents,  as  aforesaid,  founded,  erected,  and  established."* 

In  a  subsequent  clause  the  corporation  was  empowered  to 
constitute  and  discharge  any  "Governors,  Officers,  and  Minis- 
ters," as  it  should  think  fit,  and  to  make  laws  of  government 
for  the  plantation,  civil  and  criminal,  as  near  as  might  be  like 
those  of  England.  It  published,  in  1622,  a  "Brief  Kelation 
of  the  Discovery  and  Plantation  of  !N'ew  England,"  addressed 
to  the  Prince  of  Wales  (afterwards  Charles  I),  who  while  in 
his  teens,  by  approving  the  suggestion  of  Captain  John  Smith, 
was  the  first  to  give  the  country  that  name,  in  any  authoritative 
way.f  In  this  the  President  and  Council  stated  their  purpose 
to  be  to  set  up  a  general  government  in  New  England  at  some 

*  Poore,  Charters  and  Constitutions,  t,  923-5. 

t  The  first  printed  work  in  which  this  name  was  used,  instead  of  the 
old  term,  "North  Virginia,"  was  Capt.  John  Smith's  "Description  of  New 
England,"  published  in  1616.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Coll.,  4th  Series,  III,  96. 
Smith  was  the  undoubted  originator  of  the  name  New  England,  "but," 
he  says  in  his  "Advertisements  for  the  Unexperienced  Planters  of  New  Eng- 
land or  anywhere"    (Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Coll.,  3d  Series,  III,  1,  20)    "Mali- 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT.  85- 

convenient  place,  and  parcel  out  the  territory  into  several  grand 
divisions  or  "counties."  Each  of  these  was  to  be  under  a  chief 
head,  with  a  staff  of  officers,  such  as  a  steward,  comptroller, 
and  treasurer ;  and  each  subdivided  into  manors  and  lordships. 
It  had  also,  so  the  pamphlet  proceeds,  been  "provided  that  all 
cities  in  that  territory,  and  other  inferiour  towns  where  trades- 
men are  in  any  numbers,  shall  be  incorporate  and  made  bodies 
politic,  to  govern  their  affairs  and  people,  as  it  shall  be  found 
most  behoveful  for  the  publick  good  of  the  same."* 

On  March  19,  1628,  the  Council,  by  a  deed  under  its  com- 
mon seal  to  Sir  Henry  Kosewell  and  five  others,  and  their  heirs 
and  associates  forever,  made  a  grant  of  lands  for  a  settlement 
on  Massachusetts  Bay.  They,  having  first  associated  twenty 
others  with  them,  obtained  the  charter  from  the  Crown,  of 
March  4,  1629  (N.  S.)  under  which  Winthrop  and  his  company 
set  up  the  colony  of  Massachusetts. 

Robert,  Earl  of  Warwick,  was  the  President  of  the  Council 
at  least  as  early  as  January  13,  1630  (N.  S.),t  and  we  have 
the  high  authority  of  Dr.  Douglass  and  Dr.  TrumbuUi:  for 
the  assertion  that  in  that  year  the  Council  conveyed  to  him, 
by  a  grant  soon  afterwards  confirmed  by  a  royal  patent,  the 
territory  which  on  March  19,  1631,  he  transferred  by  a  deed 
under  his  own  seal  to  Lord  Say  and  Seal  and  ten  others,  and 
their  heirs  and  associates  forever. 

cious  minds  amongst  Sailers  and  others  drowned  that  name  with  the  echo 
of  Nusconcus,  Canaday,  and  Penaquid,  till  at  my  humble  sute,  our  most 
gracious  King  Charles,  then  Prince  of  Wales,  was  pleased  to  confirme  it  by 
that  title."  In  the  petition  to  the  King,  of  March  3,  1620  (N.  S.)  on  which 
the  patent  to  the  Council  of  Devon  was  issued,  the  petitioners  ask  first 
of  all,  "that  the  territories  where  yo^  peticSners  makes  their  plantacon 
may  be  caled  (as  by  the  Prince  His  Highnes  it  hath  bin  named)  New 
England."  Documents  relating  to  the  Colonial  History  of  N.  Y.,  Ill,  2. 
Smith  had  been  permitted  to  present  to  the  Prince,  in  1614,  a  copy  of 
his  journal  during  his  voyage  northwards  in  the  spring  of  that  year,  and 
of  his  map  of  the  coast  above  Cape  Cod.     Palfrey's  Hist,  of  N".  E.,  I,  94. 

*  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Coll.,  2d  Series,  IX,  22,  23. 

t  He  then  signed  a  patent  in  favor  of  the  Plymouth  settlers,  in  which 
he  is  described  as  President. 

$  Trumbull,  Hist.,  I,  547;    Douglass'  Summary,  II,  160. 


86  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

The  Council  had  a  regular  clerk,  but  its  records  have  not 
been  preserved  (although  copies  of  part  of  them  are  extant),* 
and  it  is  denied  by  some  later  historians  that  the  Earl  had  any 
title  to  convey,  t 

To  me  it  seems  more  reasonable  to  accept  Douglass'  and 
TrumbulFs  statement,  justified  as  it  is  by  repeated  declara- 
tions of  our  General  Court  during  the  seventeenth  century.  $ 

It  is  also  supported  by  a  letter  from  John  Humfrey  sent 
from  London  to  Isaac  Johnson  §  in  Massachusetts,  under  date 
of  December  9,  1630,  in  which  is  found  this  passage :  "My  lord 
of  Warw.  will  take  a  Patent  of  that  place  you  writ  of  for 
himselfe,  &  so  wee  may  bee  bold  to  doe  there  as  if  it  were  our 
owne."|l  It  is  at  least  a  fair  surmise  that  Johnson  had  pre- 
viously written  to  Humfrey  that  the  region  of  the  Connecticut 
river  was  one  adapted  to  an  English  settlement,  and  that  in 
consequence  of  this  news  the  Earl  of  Warwick  had  determined 
to  obtain  from  the  Council  for  JSTew  England  a  patent  embrac- 
ing it,  to  himself,  but  really  for  the  benefit  of  those  of  his 
Puritan  friends  who  were  then  contemplating  a  removal  to 
!N'ew  England. 

Thomas  Lechford,  an  attorney,  who  would  not  be  apt  to 
use  words  loosely,  in  his  "Plaine  Dealing,"  written  in  1641, 
says  of  the  Saybrook  and  Hartford  settlements :  "These  planta- 
tions have  a  Patent."T[ 

Two  years  later.  Parliament  put  the  Earl  of  Warwick  at 
the  head  of  a  commission  of  six  Lords  and  twelve  commoners, 
having  jurisdiction  over  all  plantations  and  islands  occupied 
under  authority  of  the  Crown.  Early  in  1647,  the  Earl,  as 
Governor  in  chief  over  foreign  plantations,  the  Earl  of  Man- 
chester and  Viscount  Say  and  Seal,  speaking  for  this  com- 

*  Massachusetts  and  its  Early  History,  162;  Records  of  the  Council  for 
N.  E.,  Cambridge  1867,  8. 

t  Massachusetts  and  its  Early  History,  148;  Johnston,  Hist.,  of  Conn., 
8,  109. 

$Hinman,  Letters,  &c.,  40,  43,  59;  Trumbull,  Hist,  of  Conn.,  I,  380, 
643. 

§  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc,  4th  Series,  VI,  4. 

II  Mr.  Johnson  had  died  more  than  two  months  before  this  was  written. 

H  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Coll.,  3d  Series,  III,  97. 


THE    SEAL    or    CONNECTICUT.  87 

mission,  wrote  to  the  colony  of  Connecticut  recognizing  its 
^^jurisdiction"  to  administer  justice,  and  stating  that  the 
committee  did  not  purpose  to  "restrain  the  bounds  of  your 
jurisdiction  to  a  narrower  compass  than  is  held  forth  by  your 
letters-patents.'^* 

This  seems  quite  a  plain  recognition  of  its  possession  of 
what  the  two  principal  parties  to  the  grant  of  March  19,  1631, 
the  grantor  and  the  ranking  grantee,  considered  a  proper  title 
for  the  purposes  of  civil  government.  It  claimed  one  by  virtue 
of  its  purchase  from  Colonel  Fenwick  of  the  Saybrook  proper- 
ties, and  from  no  other  source. 

The  evidence  that  the  Earl  executed  the  deed  to  Lord  Say 
and  Seal  and  his  associates  is  all  that  can  fairly  he  required; 
and  in  that  he  professes  to  be  the  owner  of  the  lands,  and  to 
convey  them  with  "all  jurisdictions,  rights,  and  royalties,  lib- 
erties, freedoms,  immunities,  powers,  privileges,  franchises, 
preeminences,  and  commodities  whatsoever,  which  the  said 
Eobert,  Earl  of  Warwick,  now  hath  or  had,  or  might  use,  exer- 
cise and  enjoy,  in  or  within  any  part  or  parcel  thereof.^f  It 
is  certain  also  that  those  who  received  the  grant,  thus  pur- 
porting to  pass  jura  regalia,  thought  that  they  could  appoint 
a  Governor  of  the  territory  which  it  embraced;  for  in  July, 
1635,  five  of  them  "in  their  own  names  and  in  the  name 
of  .  .  the  rest  of  the  company,"  signed  a  commission  con- 
stituting John  Winthrop,  Jr.,  "Governor  of  the  river  Connect- 
icut with  the  places  adjoining  thereunto."  This  document  they 
signed  individually,  affixing  their  own  particular  seals,  all 
impressed  on  the  same  piece  of  wax.t 

The  Warwick  deed  or  patent  of  1631  was,  in  a  measure,  a 
family  transaction.  The  Earl's  family  name  was  Eobert  Eich. 
One  of  the  grantees,  "the  right  honorable  Lord  Eich,"  was 
his  eldest  son,  and  another,  "Sir  N"athaniel  Eich,  Knt,"  a  near 
relation.  §  "Lord  Brook"  was  Baron  Brooke  of  Warwick  castle. 
It  would  be  natural  for  the  Earl  to  hand  the  deed,  as  soon  as 

*  Hubbard,  Hist,  of  New  England,  Chap.  LV. 

t  Trumbull,  Hist  of  Conn.,  I,  525. 

t  Ibid.,  527. 

§  See  his  will  in  Waters'  Genealogical  Gleanings,  II,  872. 


88  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

it  was  executed,  to  his  son  and  heir.  Such  papers  were  then 
not  recorded  in  any  public  registry  of  lands.  The  Council 
for  'New  England  surrendered  its  charter  to  the  Crown  in  1635  ; 
the  civil  war  soon  broke  out,  with  all  its  work  of  wreck;  and 
the  family  of  the  Earl  became  extinct  in  the  next  century. 
Under  such  circumstances  it  is  not  surprising  that  a  copy  of  a 
copy  of  this  Warwick  deed  is  all  that  our  State  archives  have  to 
show  to  support  our  claim  of  a  paper  title  prior  to  the  charter 
of  1662. 

It  is  important  to  observe  that  the  Earl  of  Warwick  had  the 
common  seal  of  the  Council  for  New  England  in  his  posses- 
sion for  a  considerable  period,  and  at  least  as  late  as  1633, 
this  being  apparently  against  the  will  of  a  number  of  its  mem- 
bers.* He  could  thus  have  executed,  at  any  time,  a  deed  in  its 
name  to  some  third  party,  simply  by  affixing  the  seal;  and 
then  taken  a  reconveyance  from  the  latter  to  himself.  The 
Council  being  a  corporation  and  not  a  directing  body  within 
a  corporation,  the  law  made  those  who  attended  any  meeting 
regularly  appointed  (though  only  one  or  two  might  thus  be 
present),  a  quorum  to  transact  business.  At  the  meeting  of 
l^ovember  4,  1631,  held  at  Warwick  House  in  London,  at  which 
but  two  were  present,  the  Earl  of  Warwick  and  Sir  Ferdinando 
Gorges,  several  important  grants  of  lands  were  ordered.  It 
is  by  no  means  improbable  that  at  some  of  the  regularly  called 
meetings,  which  at  this  time  were  commonly  held  at  Warwick 
House,  the  Earl  may  have  been  the  only  member  present. 

His  deed  to  Lord  Say  and  Seal  and  his  associates  was  wit- 
nessed by  two  persons,  one  of  whom  was  Walter  Williams.  A 
man  named  Williams  was  in  his  employment  in  1632,  and 
apparently  had  charge  for  the  Earl  of  the  corporate  seal  of  the 
Council,  t  Probably  he  was  the  attesting  witness,  and  if,  as 
conjectured,  there  was  an  intermediate  deed  from  the  Earl,  as 
President  of  the  Council,  under  the  corporate  seal,  to  a  dummy, 
who  was  to  and  did  reconvey  to  the  Earl  personally,  no  one 

*  Massachusetts  and  its  Early  History,  147 ;  Proceedings  of  the  Anti- 
quarian Society,  1867,  Vol.  IV,  110-113;  Winsor,  Narrative,  &c.,  Hist.,  Ill, 
309. 

t  Winsor,  Narr.  Hist.,  Ill,  370. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT.  89 

could  have  been  more  likely  than  this  Mr.  Williams  to  be 
selected  for  this  office  nor,  when  the  two  preliminary  deeds 
had  been  made,  to  attest  the  third,  by  which  the  estate  thus 
transmitted  through  him  was  made  over  to  the  real  purchasers.* 

The  grantees  under  the  deed  from  the  Earl  had  a  regular 
clerk,  as  appears  from  a  letter  of  Lord  Say  and  Seal  to  Gov- 
ernor Winthrop,  dated  December  11,  1661.  In  this  he  enclosed 
a  letter  to  the  Earl  of  Manchester,  then  Lord  Chamberlain, 
requesting  him  to  tell  the  Governor  where  he  could  speak  with 
Mr.  Jesup,  "who,"  he  adds,  "when  we  had  the  patent,  was 
our  clerk  and  he,  I  believe,  is  able  to  inform  you  best  about 
it,  and  I  have  desired  my  lord  to  wish  him  so  to  do.  I  do 
think  he  is  now  in  London.''! 

In  1636  William  Jesup  is  given  a  legacy  in  the  will  of  Sir 
!N"athaniel  Rich  of  a  kind  indicating  that  he  was  in  close  per- 
sonal relations  with  the  testator. 

In  April,  1656,  Bulstrode  Whitelock  records  an  official  con- 
ference with  the  Swedish  ambassador,  attended  also  by  "Mr. 
Jessop,  one  of  the  clerks  of  the  Council," — that  is,  of  the  Coun- 
cil of  State  under  the  Protector.^  On  April  10,  1660,  "Wil- 
liam Jessop,  Esq."  was  chosen  clerk  of  the  House  of  Commons 
of  the  Convention  Parliament.  §  It  is  probable  that  he  was  the 
former  clerk  of  the  Council  and  also  the  same  man  w^ho  had 
been  clerk  of  the  Warwick  patentees.  The  Earl  of  Manchester, 
who  was  the  presiding  officer  of  the  Convention  House  of  Peers, 
was  a  son-in-law  of  the  Earl  of  Warwick;  closely  associated 
with  him  during  the  civil  war;||  and  one  of  the  commission 
under  his  presidency  for  the  government  of  foreign  plantations. 

One  must  not  forget,  in  studying  the  documents  of  that 
century,  that  the  law  of  moneyed  corporations  was  still  in  its 
infancy.  Such  bodies  did  not  always  act,  in  making  grants, 
by  their  officers,  appointed  for  that  purpose,  under  their  com- 

*  A  "Mr.  Walter  Williams"  at  about  this  time  owned  houses  in  Bristol, 
Waters,  Genealogical  Gleanings,  I,  565. 

t  Trumbull,  Hist.,  I,  547. 

$  Memorials,  Oxford  Ed.,  IV,  243.  William  Jessop  filled  the  same  posi- 
tion in  1653  and  1654.  Whitelock,  Journal  of  the  Swedish  Embassy,  II, 
59,  456. 

§  Parliamentary  Hist,  of  England,  XXII,  233. 

II  Whitelock,  Memorials,  Oxford  Ed.,  II,  262. 


90  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

mon  seal,  as  now.  The  first  patent,  for  instance,  under  which 
the  Plymouth  settlement  obtained  any  paper  title,  was  a  deed 
from  the  Council  (of  June  1,  1621)  signed  by  six  of  the  com- 
pany only,  individually,  under  their  separate,  private  seals.* 
A  later  confirmatory  patent  (January  13,  1629,  O.  S.)  on  the 
other  hand,  though  signed  by  the  Earl  of  Warwick  alone,  pur- 
ported to  be  executed  by  him  in  the  name  of  the  Council,  and 
bears  its  common  seal.f 

The  removal  from  Massachusetts,  in  1636,  to  the  banks  of 
"the  great  river,"  and  the  foundation  of  the  three  river  towns 
under  Haynes  and  Hooker,  was  accomplished  with  the  express 
assent  of  the  Bay  Colony,  and  a  tacit  understanding  with  the 
holders  of  the  Saybrook  Patent.  There  was  at  first  no  asser- 
tion that  they  were  setting  up  an  independent  government. 
N"ot  claiming  to  be  a  separate  corporation,  they  had,  of  course, 
no  common  seal. 

The  Saybrook  patentees,  on  the  contrary,  not  only  built  forts, 
appointed  Governors  and  employed  troops,  but  procured  and 
adopted  a  common  seal. 

The  fact  that  they  took  this  step  is,  of  itself,  strong  evidence 
that  they  had  a  right  to  take  it.  It  is  unlikely  that  earls  and 
viscounts,  standing  well  at  court,  would  undertake  in  such  open 
fashion  to  infringe  on  the  royal  prerogative.  Only  if  they 
were  a  corporation,  or  a  branch  of  a  corporation,  could  the 
grantees  under  the  Warwick  deed  lawfully  use  a  common  seal. 

If  Charles  I  did  not  grant  a  charter  of  incorporation  to  them 
directly,  he  may  have  granted  a  patent  confirming  their  land 
titles,  and  they  may  have  been  justified  in  adopting  a  common 
seal  by  a  delegated  authority.  I  refer,  in  this,  to  the  clause 
in  the  charter  of  the  Council  of  Plymouth  giving  it  power  not 
only  to  adopt  a  corporate  seal  as  an  English  corporation  estab- 
lished at  Plymouth  ("one  united  Body  incorporate  here"), 
but  also  any  other  seal  or  seals  for  public  use  by  their  Governor 
or  other   "Ministers  of  ^New  England."    The  Council  may  not 

*  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Coll.,  4th  Series,  II,  156;  History  of  Plymouth  Planta- 
tion, Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Ed.,  I,  246;   Winsor,  Narrative,  &c..  Hist.,  Ill,  301. 

t  Winsor,  Narrative  Hist.,  Ill,  369 ;  Thorpe,  American  Charters,  &c.. 
Ill,  1846. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONI^ECTICUT.  91 

improbably  have  adopted  a  local  seal  for  the  Connecticut  set- 
tlements, by  some  vote,  no  copy  of  which  was  preserved.  Acts 
speak  louder  than  words,  and  after  any  long  lapse  of  years 
great  weight  must  be  attributed  to  the  fact  that  a  colonial  seal 
was  in  fact  adopted  for  the  Saybrook  plantation.  It  is  a  legal 
maxim  that  ex  diuturnitate  temporis  omnia  presumuntur  rite 
et  sollenniter  esse  acta. 

The  seal  of  the  Saybrook  patentees  was  nearly  circular  in 
form,  of  about  the  size  of  a  silver  dollar,  and  bore  for  its  design 
fifteen  vines,  arranged  in  three  rows,  the  first  of  six,  the  second 
of  ^YQy  and  the  lowest  of  four.  Above  them  a  hand,  seemingly 
thrown  forward  from  the  clouds,  held  a  pennant  bearing  the 
legend,  Svstinet  Qvi  Teanstvlit.  There  was  a  narrow  but 
rather  an  ornate  rim. 

This  muniment  of  jurisdiction  and  title  was  turned  over 
by  -Governor  Fenwick  to  the  settlers  in  the  upper  towns,  on 
and  near  the  great  river,  after  he  had  undertaken  to  convey 
to  that  "jurisdiction"  all  the  lands  covered  by  the  Warwick 
patent,  "if  it  come  into  his  power."  His  first  agreement  to 
that  effect  was  made  December  5,  1644,  and  modified  in  1646 
by  a  commutation  of  certain  customs  duties,  which  it  secured 
to  him  for  a  term  of  years,  to  an  annual  payment  of  £180.* 
In  1645  Fenwick  returned  to  England,  to  become  a  member 
of  the  Long  Parliament  and  colonel  in  the  Parliamentary  army. 
In  1649  he  was  appointed  one  of  the  Judges  of  Charles  I,  but 
did  not  sit,  as  such,  at  the  trial. 

Roger  Wolcott,  in  his  Memoir  for  the  History  of  Connecticut, 
makes  this  statement  in  regard  to  the  incident  of  the  seal : 

"The  people  of  Connecticut  for  some  time  paid  a  rent  or 
tribute  to  George  Fenwick,  Esq'^,  captain  of  Saybrook  fort. 
At  length  they  bought  the  land  and  the  fort  of  him  and  he 
promised  to  give  them  a  deed  but  failed,  but  he  gave  them  the 
Colony  Seall.  This  I  was  told  by  Daniel  Clark,  Esq"",  who  was 
the  Secretary  and  a  magistrate  in  the  Jurisdiction  at  the  time 
of  the  Charter."t 

*  Collections  of  the  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.,  Ill,  328;  Col.  Rec.  of  Conn.,  I, 
271. 

t  Collections  of  the  Conn.  Hist.  Soc,  III,  328. 


yis  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

The  seal  thus  obtained  from  Colonel  Eenwick  was  adopted 
as  the  seal  of  the  Colony  of  Connecticut  without  any  formal 
vote  of  the  General  Court,  so  far  as  appears  on  record.  Prob- 
ably they  feared  to  have  it  known  that  they  had  taken  such  a 
step,  lest  it  should  savor  too  unmistakably  of  a  claim  of  politi- 
cal independence.  Charles  I  was  still  on  the  throne,  and  the 
event  of  the  civil  war  was  uncertain. 

The  seal  thus  procured  was  used  as  a  common  seal  for  the 
consolidated  colony  at  least  as  early  as  October,  1647,  when  it 
was  set  by  Governor  Hopkins  to  a  commission  issued  to  John 
Winthrop  as  magistrate  at  ^ew  London.* 

I  have  dwelt  so  long  on  these  points  in  our  early  history 
because  the  title  of  colonial  Connecticut  to  its  soil  has  so  inti- 
mate a  connection  with  the  title  of  colonial  Connecticut  to 
its  seal. 

Let  me  recapitulate  shortly  the  positions  which  have  been 
taken,  and  the  salient  facts  mentioned. 

Every  corporation,  whether  it  be  a  public  or  private  one, 
has  the  right  to  select  and  use  a  common  seal. 

'No  other  association  of  persons  has  such  a  right. 

The  Council  of  Plymouth  for  the  planting,  ruling,  ordering 
and  governing  of  New  England,  was  incorporated  in  1620  by 
a  royal  charter,  giving  them  in  express  terms  not  only  this  right, 
but  that  of  dividing  New  England  into  a  number  of  local 
governments,  each  with  a  seal  of  its  own  and  a  Governor  of 
its  own. 

This,  in  effect,  authorized  this  Council  to  create  other  local 
public  corporations  within  !N"ew  England. 

In  or  before  1622,  the  Council  of  Plymouth  accordingly 
provided  for  the  separate  incorporation  of  all  places  where 
there  should  be  any  considerable  number  of  persons  engaged 
in  trade,  as  self-governing  communities. 

In  1635,  the  Council  was  dissolved. 

*  This  commission  is  in  the  State  Library,  in  the  Winthrop  collections. 
See  also  Col.  Rec,  of  Conn.,  I,  329,  578.  Among  other  impressions  of  this 
original  seal,  now  extant,  is  one  in  the  Winthrop  Collection  of  MSS.,  in  the 
State  Library,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  310,  upon  a  commission  to  Daniel  Witherall, 
as  Judge  of  the  County  Court. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 


93 


During  the  intervening  thirteen  years,  the  Earl  of  Warwick, 
its  President  and  the  keeper  of  its  corporate  seal,  in  1631, 
executed  a  deed  of  the  territory  now  included  in  Connecticut 
to  an  association  of  persons  headed  by  Lord  Say  and  Seal. 

Four  years  later,  in  1635,  we  find  this  association  appoint- 
ing a  Governor  of  part  of  these  Connecticut  lands,  at  the  mouth 
of  the  Connecticut  river. 

In  1636,  he  promotes  the  settlement  of  another  part  of  them, 
higher  up  on  the  river,  by  what  became  the  Colony  of  Connect- 
icut. 'Not  later  than  1644,  and  probably  much  earlier,  this 
Say  and  Seal  association  did  what  only  a  corporation  could 
lawfully  do,  by  adopting  a  common  seal.  In  that  year,  the 
then  Governor  of  the  Saybrook  settlement  and  commandant  of 
the  Saybrook  fort  is  found  to  be  in  possession,  as  such,  of  this 
common  seal,  and  transfers,  in  behalf  of  those  whom  he  repre- 
sented, the  fort,  and  with  it  the  seal,  to  the  Colony  of  Con- 
necticut, with  the  promise  to  convey  to  it  thereafter  all  the  rest 
of  the  lands  covered  by  the  deed  to  the  association,  should  it 
come  into  his  power  to  do  so. 

In  1647,  we  find  the  person  first  commissioned  Governor  of 
the  Saybrook  settlement,  accepting  from  the  Colony  of  Con- 
necticut a  commission  as  a  local  magistrate,  authenticated  under 
this  same  seal,  as  the  seal  of  that  colony. 

Is  it  not  a  probable,  if  not  a  necessary  conclusion  from  these 
'facts,  that  the  Earl  of  Warwick  either  had  proper  grants  of 
the  territory  of  Connecticut  and  authority  to  govern  it,  before 
his  deed  to  the  Saybrook  company,  or  else  that  this  deed  was 
intended  and  regarded  by  all  parties  in  interest  as  in  legal 
effect  the  deed  of  the  Council,  of  which  he  was  the  President 
and  of  whose  common  seal  he  was  then  the  keeper  ? 

As  soon  as  Connecticut  received  her  charter  (October,  1662) 
the  General  Court  declared  that  Westchester  lay  within  the 
territorial  limits  which  it  prescribed,*  and  sent  a  copy  of  the 
vote  to  its  inhabitants,  certified  under  this  same  Saybrook  seal.f 

♦  Col.  Rec,  I,  387. 

fHoadly,  The  Public  Seal  of  Connecticut,  Conn.  State  Register  for 
1889,   438. 


94  TJIE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

The  device  of  the  seal  challenges  curiosity.  Why  were  rows 
of  vines  selected  as  the  prominent  feature?  Why  were  these 
arranged  in  three  rows,  each  containing  a  different  number, 
and  all  together  numbering  fifteen  ? 

The  number  of  patentees  under  the  Warwick  deed  was  eleven. 
It  might  be  suggested  that  the  top  row  was  to  represent  six 
of  them,  and  the  second  the  others.  But  none  of  the  patentees 
had  removed  to  'New  England.  The  motto  indicates  that  those 
who  are  represented  as  receiving  divine  support  had  already 
been  transplanted. 

With  more  probability  it  may  be  surmised  that  it  refers  to 
the  three  principal  plantations  already  made  under  patents 
from  the  Council  for  New  England;  that  of  Plymouth,  that 
on  the  coast  of  Maine  under  Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges,  and  that 
of  Massachusetts  Bay. 

It  may  well  be,  also,  that  there  was  no  special  significance 
in  the  arrangement  of  the  vines  in  three  rows,  but  that  it  was 
merely  intended  to  depict  a  vineyard.  An  arangement  of  a 
vineyard  in  three  rows  would  be  natural,  in  view  of  the  form 
of  the  seal,  and  the  practice  of  heraldry,  under  which  a  '^charge*' 
on  a  coat  of  arms,  if  repeated  at  all,  is  generally  repeated  thrice. 
The  top  row  bisects  the  circle.  The  vines  in  each  row  were 
equi-distant  from  each  other.  More  therefore  could  be  put  in 
the  top  row  than  in  the  others,  and  more  in  the  second  than  in 
the  third. 

The  wild  grapes  of  this  country  made  a  strong  impression 
upon  the  early  voyagers  who  came  here  from  the  North  of 
Europe.  They  gave  it  its  name  for  the  first  discoverers — Vin- 
land — and  in  the  tract  by  Rev.  Francis  Higginson  called 
"New  England's  Plantation,"  written  in  1630,  he  says  that 
"Excellent  vines  are  here  up  and  doune  in  the  woods.  Our 
Govemour  hath  already  planted  a  vineyard  with  great  hope 
of  increase."*  This  would  sufficiently  account  for  the  selection 
of  vines,  rather  than  any  other  form  of  vegetation. 

The  design  of  each  vine  is  so  formal  that  it  bears  little  or  no 
resemblance  to  that  of  the  wild  grape  of  our  woods.     One  who 

*  Life  of  Francis  Higginson,  94. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 


96 


saw  an  impression  of  the  original  seal  in  1662,  wrote  that  he 
supposed  it  to  represent  "the  arborated  craggy  wilderness."* 

The  origin  of  the  terse  and  striking  motto  I  have  been  unable 
to  discover.     It  was  not  framed  by  the  Romans. f 

Dr.  Hoadly,  in  his  article  in  the  Connecticut  Register,  refers 
as  a  not  improbable  source  to  the  eightieth  Psalm.  Here  we 
find  these  verses : 

"8.  Thou  hast  brought  a  vine  out  of  Egypt:  thou  hast  cast  out  the 
heathen,  and  planted  it. 

9.  Thou  preparedst  room  before  it,  and  didst  cause  it  to  take  deep  root, 
and  it  filled  the  land." 

But  then  follows  a  lamentation  over  the  bitter  ruin  that 
has  since  befallen  it,  and  a  prayer  that  God  will  return  to  its 
aid,  and  visit  again  this  vineyard  of  His  planting,  and  save 
His  people.  Here  is  nothing  of  the  hopeful  spirit  in  which 
spoke  the  faith  of  the  founders  of  N'ew  England  in  the  protec- 
tion of  God.  That  dictated  the  motto  of  Connecticut,  and  we 
see  it  reappearing  at  the  beginning  of  the  next  century  in 
verses  written  to  greet  its  advent,  by  Judge  Samuel  Sewall  of 
Massachusetts.  They  were  sung  by  bell-men  on  the  streets  of 
Boston,  just  before  daybreak  on  January  2,  1701,  and  the  first 
two  read  thus : 

"Once  more,  our  God,  vouchsafe  to  shine: 
Tame  Thou  the  rigor  of  our  clime; 
Make  haste  with  Thy  impartial  light 
And  terminate  this  long,  dark  night. 

Let  the  transplanted  English  vine 
Spread  further  still:    still  call  it  Thine; 
Prune  it  with  skill:    for  yield  it  can 
More  fruit  to  Thee,  the  husbandman." 

When  the  patent  from  Charles  II,  creating  Connecticut  a 
full  public  corporation,  was  obtained,  the  General  Court  imme- 
diately and  formally  declared  the  seal  acquired  from  Colonel 
Fenwick  to  be  the  seal  of  the  colony.     On  October  9,  1662,  the 

*  Hoadly,  The  Public  Seal  of  Connecticut,  Conn.  Register,  1889,  438. 
t  Professor  E.  P.  Morris  of  Yale  informs  me  that  it  has  been  searched 
for  in  vain  by  Latin  scholars,  in  the  classical  authors. 


96  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

charter  was  produced  and  publicly  read  before  the  freemen,  and 
it  was  voted  "that  tbe  Scale  that  formerly  was  vsed  by  the 
Generall  Court  shall  still  remaine  and  be  vsed  as  y®  Scale  of 
this  Colony,  vntill  y®  Court  see  cause  to  y®  contrary,  and  the 
Secretary  is  to  keep  ye  Scale,  and  to  vse  it  on  necessary  occasions 
for  y«  Colony."* 

The  Colony  of  ITew  Haven,  a  few  years  after  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Commonwealth,  ventured  of  its  own  authority  to 
adopt  a  common  seal. 

!N"o  impression  or  description  of  this  now  exists,  so  far  as 
I  can  ascertain. 

The  vote  to  procure  one  was  passed  by  the  General  Court 
on  May  30,  1656,  in  connection  with  the  approval  of  the  com- 
pilation of  the  general  statutes  made  by  Governor  Eaton.  It 
read  thus : 

"Ordered  that  a  publique  seale  shall  be  provided  at  ye  charge  of  yo 
jurisdiction,  wch  is  to  be  ye  seale  of  this  colony,  the  bigness  of  it,  and 
ye  impression  to  be  vpon  it  they  leaue  to  ye  governour,  and  such  other  as 
he  shall  thinke  fit  to  advise  w^h  aboute  it,  to  consider  and  order."! 

One  was  thereupon  cut,  by  Eaton's  order,  in  England,  and 
sent  over  on  the  same  ship  which  brought  the  new  statute- 
book.  In  May,  1656,  he  notified  the  General  Court  of  the 
arrival  of  the  seal  and  desired  them  to  accept  it  as  a  token  of 
his  love.  J 

On  the  seizure  of  the  government  of  Connecticut  by  Sir 
Edmund  Andros,  in  168Y,  although  the  charter  had  disap- 
peared, John  Allen,  the  Secretary  of  the  Colony,  handed  over 
to  him  the  corporate  seal.§  Gershom  Bulkeley,  in  his  Will 
and  Doom,  written  not  long  after  the  resumption  of  authority 
by  the  freemen  and  General  Court,  in  consequence  of  the  acces- 
sion of  William  and  Mary,  argued  strongly  from  this  circum- 
stance that  all  charter  rights  to  existence  as  a  separate  colony 
had  been  destroyed. 

*  Col.  Eec.  of  Conn.,  I,  386. 

t  N.  H.  Col.  Rec,  I,  147. 

tlhid.,  186. 

§  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  III,  141. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 


97 


"And  now,"  he  says,  "both  their  common  seal  is  gone  and 
their  officers  are  all  gone  -by  their  own  act.  Is  not  this  a  cesser 
of  the  charter  government?  The  seal  disappears  and  the  gov- 
ernors withdraw  themselves,  suffering  their  offices  to  expire 
without  continuance,  and  is  not  this  government  now  voluntarily 
laid  down,  deserted,  and  extinct  ?"* 

When  ISTew  York  passed  into  the  possession  of  Andros  in 
September,  1688,  the  report  made  of  the  proceedings  to  the 
Lords  of  Trade  and  Plantations  states  that  as  soon  as  he  arrived 
there  "His  Excellence  sent  for  and  received  from  Coll.  Dongan 
the  seal  of  the  late  Gov*  which  was  defaced  and  broaken  in 
Councill."t  Probably  the  same  fate  befell  the  seal  of  Con- 
necticut. 

On  the  resumption  here  of  charter  government  a  new  seal 
was  procured  of  the  same  general  design.  A  representation 
of  it  appears  on  the  title  page  of  Vol.  IV  of  our  Colonial 
Records.!  The  motto  is  cut  in  larger  letters  than  those  on 
that  received  from  the  Saybrook  colony  and  the  mode  of  dis- 
playing it  is  less  symmetrical.  To  atone,  perhaps,  for  the 
bolder  lettering,  TRAN'STULIT  is  shortened  to  TRASTULIT. 
We  had  come  to  the  dark  age  of  colonial  history,  when  the  first 
generation  of  English  settlers,  led  by  graduates  of  Oxford  and 
Cambridge,  had  passed  away,  and  but  a  feeble  beginning  had 
been  made  towards  founding  classical  learning  in  'New  England. 

This  seal  was  seemingly  incapable  of  making  a  clear  impres- 
sion. On  a  commission  dated  in  1690,  which  has  been  pre- 
served in  the  State  library,  are  two  wax  seals,  each  apparently 
bearing  the  same  stamp.  One  is  almost  undecipherable  and  the 
other  not  much  better.  The  Secretary  has  put  a  note  against 
the  latter,  explaining  that  it  was  affixed  because  the  former 
was  so  bad. 

The  original  seal  received  from  Colonel  Fenwick  was  one 
only  adapted  to  printing  on  wax. 

*  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  III,  143. 

t  Doc.  relating  to  the  Col.  Hist,  of  K-Y.,  Ill,  567. 

t  Cf.  Preface  to  the  same,  v.  Impressions  on  wax  are  preserved  in  the 
State  library;  Winthrop  Coll.  of  MSS.,  II,  198  (June  30,  1690)  and 
III,  312. 

4 


98  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

The  fragility  of  sealing  wax  came  to  be  generally  recognized 
by  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth  century  as  making  some 
substitute  desirable  in  the  case  of  large  seals  on  public  docu- 
ments of  a  permanent  character.  Letters  had  often  been  closed 
with  paste.  The  thin  sort  of  paste  used  for  this  purpose  was 
called  ^Vafer."*  It  was  found  that  by  allowing  it  to  harden 
in  the  shape  of  little  cakes,  these  could  be  quickly  moistened 
and  softened  when  wanted  to  close  a  letter.  Such  forms  of  paste 
were  now  called  wafers, — a  word  previously  used  for  any 
small,  flat,  edible  cake.  For  a  public  seal,  after  being  affixed 
to  the  documents,  an  evenly  cut  piece  of  paper  of  correspond- 
ing size  called  a  "scarf,"  was  pressed  down  upon  them,  on 
which  the  device  on  the  die  was  printed  by  the  use  of  a  lever 
or  screw  press. 

It  was  apparently  in  order  to  get  the  benefit  of  this  modern 
mode  of  sealing  public  instruments  that  in  1711,  it  was  ordered 
by  the  Governor  and  Council  "that  a  new  stamp  shall  be  made 
and  cut  of  the  seal  of  this  Colony,  suitable  for  the  sealing  upon 
wafers,  and  that  a  press  be  provided  with  the  necessary  appur- 
tenances for  that  purpose,  as  soon  as  may  be,  at  the  cost  and 
charge  of  this  Colony,  to  be  kept  in  the  Secretary's  office." f 

The  authority  thus  given  was  liberally  construed  by  the 
official,  whoever  he  was,  from  whom  the  engraver  took  his  orders. 
ITot  only  was  the  new  seal  adapted  for  use  with  wafers,  as  well 
as  with  wax,  but  the  size,  shape  and  device  were  essentially 
altered. 

Governor  Wolcott's  memoir,  written  in  1Y59,  from  which  a 
quotation  has  been  already  made,  refers  to  it  thus :  "In  Gover- 
nour  Saltonstal's  time  the  seal  was  new  made  and  enlarged, 
but  the  impression  and  the  motto  is  the  same."$ 

He  must  refer  in  these  words  to  what  was  done  under  the  vote 

of  1711,  but  his  memory  evidently  betrayed  him.     That  very 

careful  historical  scholar,  the  late  Charles  J.  Hoadly,  LL.D., 

State  Librarian,  in  Vol.  VI  of  the  Colonial  Records,  gives  a 

fac  simile  of  the  seal  as  recut  in  1711,  which  represents  it  as 

*  Bailey's  Diet.,  1733,  in  vert. 

t  Col.  Rec.  of  Conn.,  V,  1706-1716,  290. 

%  Conn.  Hist.  Soc.  Collections,  III,  328. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT.  99 

an  oval,  with  a  double  border,  containing  the  words  SIGILLVM 
C0L0:N'I^E  CON^NECTICElSrSIS,  and  enclosing  three  vines 
only,  with  the  motto  QVI  TEAl^STVLIT  SVSTIl^ET.*  The 
hand  which  in  the  original  seal  emerged  from  the  clouds  to 
sustain  a  pennant  bearing  this  motto  is  in  this  reproduction 
aimlessly  stretched  out  above  the  pennant ;  and  the  whole  design 
is  stiff  and  unpleasing.  The  Saybrook  patentees,  no  doubt, 
had  their  die  cut  in  London.  The  American  engraver  was  not 
yet  equal  to  the  British. 

The  blunder  in  Latinizing  the  name  of  the  colony  was 
obvious.  When  Lord  Eldon,  who  was  somewhat  inclined  to 
petty  economies,  died,  the  funereal  hatchment  set  up  over  the 
door  of  his  house  bore  the  legend  Mors  janua  vita.  A  passer-by 
noticed  the  slip  of  using  the  nominative,  vita,  for  the  genitive 
case.  "^0  slip  at  all,''  said  his  companion:  ^'his  Lordship 
undoubtedly  left  particular  directions  to  have  it  so,  in  order 
to  avoid  the  expense  of  the  additional  letter  which  a  diphthong 
would  require." 

'No  such  parsimony  can  be  imputed  to  Connecticut  for 
(though  after  deliberating  over  it  for  some  forty  years),  in 
October,  1747,  the  General  Assembly  voted  ^'that  the  publick 
Seal  of  this  Colony  be  altered  and  changed  from  the  form  of 
an  oval  to  that  of  a  circle,  and  that  the  same  shall  have  cut  and 
engraved  upon  it  the  same  inscription,  motto,  and  device  that 
are  on  the  present  seal,  with  a  correction  of  such  mistakes  as 
happened  in  the  spelling  and  letters  in  the  inscription  and  motto 
of  the  present  seal,  and  the  Secretary  of  this  Colony  is  directed 
to  procure  such  alteration  at  the  cost  of  this  Colony  as  soon  as 
conveniently  may  be."  ISTothing  was  done  by  the  Secretary, 
however,  and  the  seal  remained  unchanged  until  the  Colony 
became  a  sovereign  State,  f 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  reason  which  led  the  Governor 
and  Council  in  1711  to  reduce  the  number  of  vines  from  fifteen 

*  An  excellent  impression  on  wax  has  been  preserved  in  the  seal  set  to 
the  charter  of  Yale  C!ollege  in  1745.  It  is  enclosed  in  a  silver  box; 
attached  to  ribbons  dependent  from  the  parchment;  and  is  in  perfect 
condition  in  all  respects. 

tCol.  Rec.  of  Conn.,  VI,  iii;    IX,  333. 


100  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

to  three  was  thus  to  symbolize  the  three  plantations  of  Hartford, 
Windsor  and  Wethersfield,  whose  people  combined  in  adopting 
the  Fundamental  Orders  of  1639.* 

It  seems  to  me  much  more  probable,  as  surmised  by  Dr, 
Leonard  Bacon,t  that  they  desired  to  commemorate  in  this  way 
the  union  of  the  three  early  colonies,  which  had  been  set  up  here 
in  the  preceding  century. 

The  Connecticut  of  1711  had  risen  out  of  the  consolidation 
of  three  separate  political  communities: — the  jurisdiction  of 
Connecticut  River  having  its  seat  at  Hartford;  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  Warwick  patentees  having  its  seat  at  Saybrook ;  and  the 
jurisdiction  of  'New  Haven  having  its  seat  at  New  Haven. 
With  the  first  of  these  the  second  was  virtually  united  in  1644, 
and  the  third  in  1662.  The  triune  character  of  the  resulting 
Colony  of  Connecticut  it  was  natural  and  appropriate  to  com- 
memorate in  this  way. 

An  important  step  in  that  direction  had  been  taken  two  years 
before.  In  June,  1709,  the  General  Court  directed  an  issue 
of  colony  bills  of  credit  to  ^'be  indented  and  stamped  with  such 
stamps  as  the  Governor  and  Council  shall  direct."  $  The  Gov- 
ernor and  Council  thereupon  ordered  "that  the  said  bills  of 
credit  shall  be  all  stamped  with  the  arms  of  the  Colony  or 
such  a  figure  as  this.''  A  figure  followed,  circular  in  form, 
with  the  three  vines  in  the  center.  One  of  the  same  description, 
except  that  it  is  oval  instead  of  circular,  and  set  upon  an  orna- 
mental shield,  appeared  on  the  bills  when  issued.  § 

The  seal  made  under  the  vote  of  1711  was  used  more  or 
less  until  1784.  As  it  purported  on  its  face  to  be  that  of  a 
colony,  it  was  ill  adapted,  after  Connecticut  proclaimed  her 
independence,  for  the  service  of  a  sovereign  State.  In  a  com- 
mission issued  August  17,  1776,  to  Rev.  Ebenezer  Baldwin  of 
Danbury,  as  chaplain  of  the  fourth  and  sixteenth  regiments  of 
our  militia  in  the  Continental  army,  by  "Jonathan  Trumbull, 
Esquire,  Governor  and  Commander  in  Chief  of  the  State  of 

*  Johnston,  Connecticut,  73. 
t  Historical  Discourses,   16,  note. 
tCol.  Rec,  1706-1716,  111. 
§  Ihid.,  XV,  562. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 


101 


Connecticut  in  'New  England  in  America"  the  subscription 
clause  is,  "Given  under  my  Hand  and  Seal  at  Arms  in  the 
State  aforesaid  at  Lebanon  the  17th  day  of  August,  Anno 
Domini,  1776,"  and  the  seal  affixed  was  impressed  with  the 
Turnbull  arms,  which  the  Connecticut  Trumbull s  had  the  right 
to  bear.*  On  this  three  bulls'  heads  appear  where  one  would 
look  for  the  three  vines. 

The  subscription  clause  of  a  commission  issued  by  Governor 
Trumbull,  at  Lebanon,  July  21,  1777,  to  Eoger  Sherman,  Sam- 
uel Huntington,  and  Titus  Hosmer,  as  delegates  to  the  Spring- 
field Convention  of  that  year  is  of  the  same  tenor.  On  the 
other  hand,  a  commission  preserved  in  the  State  Library,  to 
Lieutenant  John  Hamlin,  issued  through  the  Secretary's  office 
at  New  Haven,  in  1776,  has  the  old  colonial  seal  used  with  this 
subscription  clause:  "Given  under  my  Hand  and  the  Seal  of 
this  State  in  !N^ew  Haven  the  first  day  of  N^ovember,  A.  D. 
1776." 

These  papers  indicate  a  natural  resort  to  temporary  make- 
shifts between  the  date  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  and 
the  adoption  of  a  proper  seal  for  the  new-born  State.. 

In  1777,  an  issue  was  made  of  colony  bills  of  credit,  which 
bear  a  device  containing  but  a  single  vine.  Of  course  it  does 
not  profess  to  represent  the  seal  of  the  State. 

It  must  always  be  remembered  that  what  is  commonly  spoken 
of  as  the  arms  of  the  State  or  Colony  is  something  quite  dif- 
ferent from  the  seal. 

The  Colony  never  had  any  coat  of  arms,  properly  so  called. 
It  could  not  have  assumed  one  without  royal  permission ;  and 
this  it  never  had.  The  State  has  not  desired  to  perpetuate  a 
system  of  Herald's  Colleges  and  armorial  bearings  for  a 
favored  few,  although  finally,  in  1897,  it  stated  what  its  own 
arms  were.  Prior  to  that  time,  however,  what  were  the  arms 
of  the  State,  in  popular  acceptation,  had  been  described  in  tech- 
nical terms,  by  Dr.  Charles  J.  Hoadly,  thus:    "Argent,  three 

*  Stuart,  in  his  Life  of  Jonathan  Trumbull,  gives  a  cut  of  the  arms, 
enclosed  within  a  circle,  probably  taken  from  the  Grovernor's  seal,  as  the 
size  and  shape  are  the  same. 


102  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

vines  supported  and  fructed  proper."*  In  other  words,  it  was 
three  fruit-bearing  grape  vines,  emblazoned  in  their  natural 
colors,  on  a  white  field. 

While  we  have  no  statute  in  this  State  describing  with  accu- 
racy the  seal  of  the  State,  there  is  one,  passed  in  the  year  last 
mentioned  (1897)  on  the  application  of  the  Daughters  of  the 
Revolution,  describing  the  flag,  and,  by  reference,  the  arms. 
This  is  contained  in  Section  4889  of  the  General  Statutes,  and 
provides  as  follows: 

"The  dimensions  of  the  flag  shall  be  five  feet  and  six  inches  in  length; 
four  feet  four  inches  in  width.  The  flag  shall  be  of  azure  blue  silk, 
charged  with  a  shield  of  rococo  design  of  argent  white  silk,  having  embroid- 
ered in  the  center  three  grape  vines,  supported  and  bearing  fruit  in 
natural  colors.  The  bordure  to  the  shield  shall  be  embroidered  in  two 
colors,  gold  and  silver.  Below  the  shield  shall  be  a  white  streamer,  cleft 
at  each  end,  bordered  by  gold  and  browns  in  fine  lines,  and  upon  the 
streamer  shall  be  embroidered  in  dark  blue  letters  the  motto  'Qui  Trans- 
tulit  Sustinet';    the  whole  design  being  the  arms  of  the  State." 

In  1673,  the  General  Court,  in  providing  for  a  Revision  of 
the  Colonial  Statutes  which  was  soon  afterwards  published  at 
Cambridge,  ordered  "that  the  impression  of  the  Coloney  Seale 
shall  be  aflfixed  in  the  beginning  of  every  law-booke,"t  and 
it  was  done  accordingly.  Massachusetts  in  like  manner  had 
the  year  before  put  a  wood-cut  impression  of  her  seal  on  the 
Revision  of  her  Statutes,  t 

Except  in  this  instance,  throughout  the  colonial  era  it  was 
usual  to  put  the  royal  arms  on  the  title  page  of  each  Revision 
of  the  Laws  of  Connecticut,  and  at  the  head  of  each  issue  of 
Session  Laws.  It  was  omitted  first  in  the  Session  Laws  of 
the  May  Session,  1776,  and  Connecticut  is  styled,  not,  as 
before,  "His  Majesty's  English  Colony  of  Connecticut  in  ^N'ew 
England  in  America,"  but  the  "English  Colony  of  Connect- 
icut in  'New  England  in  America."  In  the  Session  Laws  of 
the  October  Session,  1776,  it  is  first  described  as  the  "State 
of  Connecticut." 

*  Conn.  Reg.  for  1889,  440. 
t  Col.  Rec,  1605-1677,  201. 
±  Green,  John  Foster,  11. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 


103 


In  May,  1784,  tlie  General  Assembly  adopted  this  resolu- 
tion :* 

''Whei^eas,  the  circumscription  of  the  seal  of  this  State  is 
improper  and  inapplicable  to  our  present  constitution, 

''Resolved,  by  this  Assembly,  that  the  Secretary  be  and  he  is 
hereby  empowered  and  directed  to  get  the  same  altered  from 
the  words  as  they  now  stand  to  the  following  inscription,  namely, 
SiGiLL.  Keip.  Connecticutensis/' 

The  Secretary  did  not  follow  these  instructions  with  exact- 
ness. The  words  descriptive  of  the  seal  itself  were  spelled  out 
in  full,  thus :   Sigillum  Keipublicae  Connecticutensis. 

He  also  re-arranged  them  so  as  to  give  a  more  symmetrical 
appearance  to  the  whole  device,  and  omitted  the  hand  which 
for  nearly  two  centuries  had  upheld  the  pennant  or  scroll 
bearing  the  motto. 

At  the  October  Session  of  the  same  year,  the  new  design 
was  approved  by  the  Assembly  and  the  seal  made  thenceforth 
the  seal  of  the  State.  The  fee  to  the  Secretary  for  affixing 
it  to  any  document  was  made  one  shilling. f 

Apparently  a  sketch  had  been  made  of  the  seal  as  originally 
ordered,  for  a  wood-cut  of  the  State  arms  in  such  a  form  is 
prefixed  to  the  published  Session  Laws  of  October,  1784.  This 
coat  of  arms  with  the  accompanying  legends  varies  somewhat 
in  detail  from  that  of  the  Colony.  There  are  the  three  vines 
arranged  in  an  oval,  upon  an  escutcheon ;  but  the  outer  inscrip- 
tion around  the  rim  is  now  Connedicutensis  Sigill.  Reip.,  and 
the  legend  within  the  oval  is  shortened  to  Qui  Tra.  Sus. 

The  same  design  appears  upon  the  title  page  of  the  Kevision 
of  that  year,  and  heads  each  issue  of  the  Session  Laws  down 
to  that  for  the  October  Session,  1796,  in  which  the  device  is 
considerably  altered.  The  oval  now  stands  alone,  instead  of 
being  displayed  on  an  escutcheon.  The  QUI  TEA.  SUS. 
which  it  formerly  contained  is  omitted,  but  QUI  TRAIN'S- 
TULIT  SUSTINET  appears  upon  a  narrow  scroll  beneath, 

*  Stat.  Eev.  of  1784,  64,  218. 

t  Stat.  Rev.  of  1784,  64,  218.  Impressions  are  preserved  in  the  State 
Library.     Pearne  Collection,  1759-1800,  34,  35. 


104  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

each  end  of  whicli  curls  over  a  sprig  with  leaves.  The  top 
of  the  oval  is  crowned  by  a  garland  of  leaves,  supported  partly 
by  the  oval  and  partly  by  rosettes  on  each  side  of  it,  which 
falls  low  enough  to  touch  the  sprays  rising  from  the  bottom. 

The  Session  Laws  for  the  October  Session,  1792,  are  headed 
by  a  device  much  like  the  former  one,  used  prior  to  1791 ; 
but  that  on  the  Laws  of  the  May  Session,  1793,  is  identical 
with  that  on  those  of  1791. 

In  the  Compilation  of  the  Statutes  of  1796,  the  seal  on  the 
title  page  is  in  shape  a  shield,  and  the  inner  legend  is  Qui 
Trans.  Sust  In  that  of  1808,  Qui  trans,  sust.  appears  on  a 
scroll  under  the  shield,  and  on  each  side  of  the  shield  is  a 
leafy  branch.  The  title  page  of  "Book  II''  of  the  Laws,  com- 
mencing with  those  of  the  October  Session  of  that  year,  but 
published  in  1819,  represents  the  arms  with  the  motto  inside 
the  shield  again,  and  abbreviated  to  QUI  TKAIST.  SUST. 

So  far  as  the  different  changes  in  the  words  or  place  of  the 
motto  are  concerned,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  mottoes  form 
regularly  no  part  of  an  English  coat  of  arms.  They  are  not 
mentioned  in  patents  granting  arms  and  form  no  part  of  the 
"estate"  granted.  Whoever  has  a  grant  of  arms  can  adopt 
any  motto  that  he  pleases,  and  the  officers  of  arms  will  then 
record  it. 

Until  the  eighteenth  century,  few  coats  of  arms  of  English 
families  had  any  appurtenant  motto  at  all.* 

The  variations  from  time  to  time  in  the  design  of  the  State 
arms  would  seem  to'  indicate  that  the  Secretary,  in  printing  the 
Session  Laws  or  General  Revisions,  left  a  considerable  latitude 
to  the  engraver  of  the  wood-cut,  or  to  the  discretion  of  the 
printer  in  choosing  which  of  several  wood-cuts  should  be  used. 

The  seal  of  the  State  itself,  which  was  in  the  Secretary's 
keeping,  remained  identically  the  same  from  1784  to  1842. 

The  frequent  changes  in  the  wood-cuts  of  the  State  arms 
seem  to  have  attracted  public  attention  by  the  time  when  the 
people  became  ready  to  frame  their  Constitution  of  govern- 
ment, and  in  that  of  1818  we  find  these  provisions  on  that 
subject: 

*  Fox-Davies,  Complete  Guide  to  Heraldry,  448,  449. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT.  105 

"Art.  4,  Sec.  11.  All  commissions  .  .  .  Shall  be  sealed  with  the 
State  seal,  signed  by  the  Governor  and  attested  by  the  Secretary." 

"Sec.  18.  A  Secretary  shall  be  chosen.  ...  He  shall  be  the  keeper 
of  the  seal  of  the  State  which  shall  not  be  altered." 

In  the  next  Kevision  (that  of  1821),  no  design  in  the  nature 
of  a  seal  appears  on  the  title  page.  l!^or  do  we  find  one  again  in 
the  Session  Laws  until  1827,  when  a  cut  is  printed  in  the  same 
form  as  that  in  the  Ee vision  of  1808. 

In  1840  the  General  Assembly  took  the  following  action : 

"Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  State  be  instructed  to  ascertain  the 
proper  seal  and  bearings  of  this  State,  and  report  to  the  next  session 
of  the  General  Assembly;  and  also  whether  any  legislative  enactment 
is  required  for  a  proper  description  of  said  seal."* 

It  was  probably  unfortunate  that  we  then  had  as  Secretary 
that  enthusiastic  antiquarian,  Koyal  R.  Hinman.  He  knew 
so  well  the  difficulty  of  the  task  thus  imposed  upon  him,  and 
was  so  unwilling  to  do  anything  imperfectly,  that  he  never 
made  any  report  whatever. 

Apparently  by  this  time  the  die  for  the  seal  approved  in 
1Y84  had  become  worn  out,  for  in  1842  the  General  Assembly 
passed  this  resolution: 

"Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  be  and  he  is  hereby  authorized  to  procure 
a  new  state  seal,  similar  to  the  one  now  in  use."t 

The  seal  procured  under  this  authority  was  in  use  for  about 
forty  years. 

The  die  was  in  fact  a  little  broader  than  that  of  its  prede- 
cessor, and  each  vine  is  made  to  bear  three  clusters  of  grapes, 
although  in  that  the  two  upper  ones  had  each  four  clusters 
and  the  lower  one  five.  The  press  was  a  screw  press,  with  arms 
some  three  feet  long. 

Originally,  and  for  many  years,  the  seal  of  1842  was  used 
with  wax.  J     Later  it  was  commonly  used  with  a  wafer,  and  a 

*  Resolves  and  Private  Acts,  1840,  67. 

t  Resolves  and  Private  Acts,  Special  October  Session,  1842,  17. 

IHon.  N.  D.  Sperry,  then  the  oldest  living  ex-Secretary  of  the  State, 
informed  the  writer,  in  1910,  that  this  was  the  case  when  he  was  in  oflfice, 
which  was  in  1855  and  1856. 


106  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

notched  paper  ^'scarf."*  About  1880,  the  Secretary  (the  late 
Chief  Justice  Torrance)  had  a  new  die  cut,  as  nearly  like 
the  old  one  as  possible,  under  the  directions  of  the  chief  clerk 
(Mr.  Robinson  S.  Hinman),  suitable  for  stamping  directly 
on  the  document  to  be  sealed,  without  the  intervention  of  any 
wafer  or  scarf.  A  press  of  modern  style,  worked  with  a  lever, 
was  also  procured. 

The  only  special  authority  for  this  action  was  a  Resolution 
of  the  General  Assembly,  passed  in  1864,  empowering  the  Sec- 
retary to  procure  "a  new  State  seal,  similar  to  the  one  now 
in  use."t  Dr.  Hoadly,  who  was  quite  a  stickler  for  forms, 
once  said  that  the  old  die  which,  though  still  capable  of  use, 
had  been  laid  aside,  was  the  real  thing,  and  the  other  was  only 
"Hinman's  seal." 

During  the  period  of  the  interregnum  from  1901  to  1903, 
the  old  seal  was  carefully  hidden  away  by  Mr.  Hinman  in  the 
vault  of  the  Executive  offices  in  the  capitol,  lest  those  who 
claimed  that  Luzon  B.  Morris  was  the  real  Governor  should 
by  chance  get  hold  of  it,  and  undertake  to  issue  commissions 
or  perform  other  acts  of  State. 

The  die  of  the  seal  of  1784  was  engraved  on  a  silver  plate, 
which  was  soldered  upon  a  brass  shoe,  still  preserved  in  the 
State  Library.  The  silver  plate  was  given  by  Hon.  Charles 
W.  Bradley,  in  1846,  when  he  was  Secretary  of  the  State,  to 
Yale  College,  and  is  in  the  University  Library. 

The  die  for  the  seal  of  1842  was  engraved  on  brass. 

In  1889  a  Secret  Ballot  Act  was  passed,  requiring  the  Secre- 
tary to  furnish  official  ballots  and  envelopes  for  the  use  of  all  the 
electors.  The  envelopes  were  to  be  ^ ^stamped  with  the  seal 
of  the  State."$ 

It  is  one  of  the  traditions  of  the  capitol  that  this  was  con- 
strued by  the  Secretary  as  requiring  the  great  seal  itself  to  be 
stamped  on  every  envelope,  and  that  in  using  the  seal  of  1882 
for  that  purpose  it  was  effectually  used  up. 

*  This  was  the  practice  in  1870,  as  the  writer  was  informed  by  R.  S. 
Hinman,  Esq.,  the  chief  clerk  in  the  Secretary's  office  for  many  years, 
t  Special  Acts  for  1864,  151;   Hoadly,  Conn.  Reg.  for  1889,  441. 
$  Public  Acts  of  1889,  155,  Sec.  3. 


THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT.      ''•*•:.,  f  ;'  XO,^^ .; 

The  growth  of  the  State  has  necessarily  called  for  a  more 
frequent  use  of  the  seal  in  many  ways,  and  during  the  past 
thirty  years  three  new  ones  in  all  have  been  cut.*  Conforma- 
bly to  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  the  character  of  the 
device  in  all  respects,  however,  has  remained  unaltered.  One 
of  these,  engraved  on  copper,  which  was  accidentally  mutilated 
by  being  struck  upon  a  pin,  was  recently  deposited  in  the 
corner  stone  of  the  new  State  Library  and  Supreme  Court 
building. 

There  have  then,  in  the  history  of  Connecticut,  been  three 
and  only  three  great  seals:  that  received  from  the  original 
Saybrook  patentees  about  1644,  and  awlc^vardly  reproduced 
after  the  overthrow  of  the  Andros  government,  about  1690; 
that  cut  in  1711 ;  and  that  now  in  use,  the  first  die  for  which 
was  cut  in  1784. 

The  original  motto  has  remained  throughout  unchanged, 
except  that  the  words  have  been  re-arranged;  SUSTIXET 
QUI  TEAIS^STULIT  being  replaced  in  1711,  in  the  interest 
of  better  Latinity,  by  QUI  TEAE'STULIT  SUSTI:N'ET.  A 
human  hand  was  represented  near  the  motto  in  the  two  first 
seals,  but  disappeared  in  that  of  1784. 

The  symbol  of  the  vine  or  the  vineyard  has  been  uniformly 
retained,  though  with  a  change  in  number,  which  was  first 
made  in  1711. 

The  original  seal  contained  no  statement  of  what  it  was; 
nor  did  that  which  temporarily  replaced  it.  In  the  second 
such  a  statement  in  Latin  was  added,  and  this  was  followed  in 
substance  in  the  third,  when  the  colony  had  become  a  sovereign 
State. 

But  one  thing,  then,  has  stood  absolutely  the  same  upon  her 
seal,  during  the  whole  life  of  Connecticut.  It  is  the  three  words 
that  expressed  the  faith  of  the  fathers  in  the  goodness  of  God. 
Those  whom  He  had  transplanted,  they  said.  He  is  sustaining. 
Belief  in  God,  and  an  attitude  towards  Him  of  reverence  and 

*  So  I  am  informed  by  Hon.  Richard  J.  Dwyer,  Deputy  Secretary  of 
the  State,  who  has  been  connected  with  the  Secretary's  office  during  all 
that  period. 


10.8    :      .     .  THE    SEAL    OF    CONNECTICUT. 

thankfulness  have  ever  been  a  characteristic  of  our  people ;  and 
each  succeeding  generation  for  now  nearly  three  centuries  has 
thought  it  fit  that  they  should  thus  be  commemorated  upon  our 
seal  of  State. 


m 


J    :3aldv/int   ^ 

33 

Gaylord  1 

M«k«f 

,        The  seal 

Of  Oonnecti- 

Syracuse, 
PMJA1L21. 

^   out. 

. 

UNIVERSITY  GF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

'^M 
Wm 


^^^ 


